On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 10:56 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 18:00 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 07:35:44AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Perhaps Cesar can use his script as a starting point to find those
> > > pattern invalidating commits or maybe add the capability (or a
> > > --strict check) to checkpatch.
> > So, yeah, I can see how checkpatch saying: "you've just renamed a
> > file and thusly invalidated a pattern in MAINTAINERS. Pls, consider
> > correcting the pattern" could make sense. And I would even add it to
> > default functionality since the MAINTAINERS patterns are something we
> > want to always have up-to-date, IMO.
>
> Maybe something like this:
A trivial correction:
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -1556,6 +1559,19 @@ sub process {
> ERROR("MODIFIED_INCLUDE_ASM",
> "do not modify files in include/asm, change architecture specific files in include/asm-<architecture>\n" . "$here$rawline\n");
> }
This needs a new test here to avoid chirping
on files that aren't added, deleted or renamed.
next if ($realfile eq $modifiedfile);
> +
> + my $action = "renames $modifiedfile to $realfile";
> + $action = "creates file $realfile" if ($modifiedfile =~ m@dev/null@);
> + $action = "deletes file $modifiedfile" if ($realfile =~ m@dev/null@);
> +
> + CHK("MAINTAINERS",
> + "Patch $action, update MAINTAINERS?\n");
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
